IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) 7 /. {/ :/ 1.0 I.I 1.25 lit. IIM IM It m 1.4 IM 2.2 IIM 1= 1.6 P^ A ^; ^1 %. ^ o^' om /A ///. Photographic Sciences Corporation 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 (716) 872-4503 i/x CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHIVI/ICMH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques The Institute has attempted to obtain the bast original copy available for filming. Features of this copy which may be bibliographically unique, which may alter any of the images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checked below. L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a 6t6 possible de se procurer. Las details de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-etre uniques du point de vue bibliogrcphique, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la m6thode normale de filmage sont indiqu6s ci-dessous. □ □ □ D D D D a Coloured covers/ Couverture de couleur Covers damaged/ Couverture endommagee Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaurde et/ou pellicul6e Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque Coloured maps/ Cartes g^ographiques en couleur Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur Bound with other material/ Relie avec d'autres documents Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior m?;gin/ La reliure serree peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distortion le long de la marge int^rieure Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajoutdes lors dune restauration apparaissent dans le texte, mais, lorsque cela §tait possible, ces pages n'ont pas 6t6 film6es. □ Coloured pages/ Pages de couleur □ Pages damaged/ Pages endommag^es y Pages restored and/or laminated/ Pages restaur^es et/ou pelliculees Q Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ Pages d^colorees, tachet^es ou piquees □ Pages detached/ Pages detachees I 1/^howthrough/ LAd Transparence □ Quality of print varies/ Qualite inegale de I'impression □ Includes supplementary material/ Comprend du materiel supplementaire □ Only edition available/ Seule Edition disponible D Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to ensure the best possible image/ Les pages totalement ou partieliement obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, etc., ont 6t^ film^es d nouveau de facon d obtenir la meilieure image possible. □ Additional comments:/ Commentaires supplementaires; This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est filmd au taux de reduction indiqu6 ci-dessous. 10X 14X 18X 22X 26X 30X \ 12X 16X 20X 24X 28X 32X The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks to the generosity of: Library of the Public Archives of Canada L'exemplaire filmd fut reproduit grSce d la g6n6rosit6 de: La bibliothdque des Archives publiques du Canada The images appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibility of the original copy and m keeping with the filming contract specifications. Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed beginning with the front cover and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All other original copies are filmed beginning on the first page with a orinted or illustrated impres- sion, and ending c \ the last page with a printed or illustrated impression. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol —»• (meaning "CON- TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever applies. Les images "^uivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec le plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et de la nettetd de l'exemplaire film6, et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de filmage. Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en papier est imprimde sont filmds en commenpant par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la dernidre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second plat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires originaux sont film^s en commenpant par la premidre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par la dernidre page qui comporte une telle empreinte. Un des symboles suivants apparaitra sur la dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le cas: le symbole — ♦- signifie "A SUIVRE ", le symbole V signifie "FIN". Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre filmds d des taux de reduction diffdrents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre repioduit en un seul clichd, il est filmd d partir de Tangle sup6rieur gauche, de gauche d droite, et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'images ndcessaire. Les diagrammes suivants illustrent la mdthode. 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 A SPEECH Of Sir JOHN A. MACDONALD, M.P, ON JESUITS' ESTATES ACT, DBLIVBRBD IN THB HOUSE OF COMMONS, ON THURSDAY, MARCH 28th, 1889. Sir JOHN A. MAC DONALD. At this late hour, and after the subject before us has been go fully discussed, [ do not feel myself warranted in addressing the House at any length, and I am too well pleased and satisfied with the course taken by my hon. friend who has just s'^oken in sup- porting the policy of the (xovernment on this occasion to feel very indignant at the reproofs and reproaches thrown across the floor in the course of his speech. In fact it is a bitter pill for my hon. friend to be obliged to vote for us. He is obliged to do it. He dare not do otherwise. He could* not face Quebec if ho did anything else. So he takes bis re- venge by pitching into the Government generally, and that, I take it, is the meann by which he reconciles it to his con- science to vote in favor of the Government. Like mine An- cient Pistol, " he eats his leek in earnest of revenge," and so he strays off to all kinds of irrelevant subjects. Ho brought in the Streams Bill, brought in the modus vivendi, he dis- cussed the double-faced policy of the Conservative party, as he says, since 186 1. As to that double-faced policy, I par- don my hon. friend for his great mistake in that regard. He is a young man. I cannot say of him, as the hon. mem- (5 1) ber for Northumberland (Mr. Mitchell) said of my hon, friend here, that ho is a flodging politician, but he is a young man, and ho forgets the hiistory of Canada since 1854. Why, he said that, while we profossod to bo the friends of Lower Canada and the friends of the French race and the friends of Catholicism in the Provinco of (Quebec, we were equally strong as the advocates of Protestantism in the Province of Upper Canada, that we were avowing ourselves in that Province ap, Englishmen, as Anglo-Saxons, and as being opposed to French domination. The hon. gentleman has forgotten the history of his country. He has forgotten that, for years, J was in a minority in my own Provinco. The hon. gentleman knows that 1 waw attacked by the organ oj the Liberal pHrty in Upper Canada yoar after year as being recreant to Pi'otestantism, as being recreant to the British race, as succumbing to French iniinonce, as l)oing the tool and the subHcrvicnt slave of the French people. Why, who opposed the cry of representation by j^opiilation but myself and my party; who supported the separate schools against tho whole weight of the Liberal party of Ontario, headed at that time by tho late Hon. Ceorgo Brown, but myself and my party ? The opposition to both those cries was unpopular, especially in regard to repre- sentation by population, which seemed to bo fair. My op- position to representation by population, in the interests of Lower Canada, was held out as being unjast and unfair to my own race and Province. Why did I oppose I ? Tho Liberal party and their leader — and he was a real leader of men — 1 mean the Hon. George Brown, was supported by his party in that policy, and he had at his command the able newspaper which he conducted and owned, the Olohe — abused and attacked me without stint bocauee I opposed representation by population ; and why did I oppose it? Because the loader of that party did not conceal the object for which he desired a majority in the United Legislature of Canada. He said that tho French language must bo put down. He said that the Anglo- Saxon race and English law mast prevail, and that threat against our fellowsubjacts in the Province of Lower Canada was 80 strongly pressed, and was so imminent, that I did not hesitate to incur tho obloquy which was poured upon mo for years, the result of which was that I was in the minority in my own Province during most of the time from 1854 to 1866. The hon. gentleman is rather ungrateful for the years and years during which 1 stood as the advocate for the Province of Lower Canada, of the French race, and of my Catholic fellow-oountrymen. Aye, Sir, and more than 1 3 that; although I ^ae in a minority I had a very respectable Protestant Conservative support, and the main body of the Consirvative support that 1 received in the Province of On- tario was from the Orange body. The majority of the Orange body was Conservative, and they stood by mo. In the first place I had the Grand Master of the Orange body, the lale George Bonjurain, who, chief of the Orangemen as he was, never failed in voting with me "for the protection of the Lower Canadians, their country, their rnco, and their religion, from the por- Histent and factious attacks that were made upon them- by the Liberal party of Ontario Well, after a vvhile Mr. George Benjamin disappeared, I had the support of another Grand Master of the Orangemen in the present Minister of Customs. Orangeman as he was, chief of the Orangemen as he was. he never failed in doing full justice to Lower Canada, its rights, its religion and its interests. The hon. gentleman then strayed off into the Streams Bill. Well, the hon. gentleman quoted what was said in thq report on the Streams Bill. Ho forgot that the report and the action of the Government on the Streams Bill were based on the authority of a report of the Minister of Justice in the Gov- ernment of which he was a member, which Government dis- allowed a Bill passed by the Legislature of Prince Edward Island on precisely the same grounds as the Streams Bill rejection was approved by us. Let the hon. gentleman look back, and he will find that the Govei-nment of that day notwithstanding their strong affection for provincial rights, disallowed a measure on the 8am« grounds, first, because it was ex post facto, and, second, because it was Us pendens, and the subject already before the courts. Then my hon. friend says that although wo are very slow in some things, we are very quick in others j that, for instance, there was the modus vivendi, which we had to decline to grant, although my hon. friend had moved it, and then a few days afterwards we had agreed to continue it The hon. gentleman must not lay the flat- tering unction to his soul that his motion had anything to do in the world with the action of the Government on tliat point. I can prove it in the easiest and clearest possible way. The hon. gentleman will, perhaps, remember my speech on the occasion in answer to that motion. I asked the hon. gentleman to allow the matter to stand over, not to press that subject while a Government was just going out in the United States, and to wait and see— I only asked for six days— whether the incoming Government were going to be friendly or were going to adopt a nondnter- coorso policy, [said — tho hon. gentleman must romem- bor it — wait until we see if there is any evidence of hos- tility, if it [» not going to be a non-intcreourBO Govcrn- moDt, then it will be time enough to deal with that subject. 1 could not tell the hon. gentleman ui that time, but i can tell him now. His motion was made on the 26ih of Febru- ary. On the 4th of February the first communication to tho colony of Newfoundland was made. My telegram was : " Have temporarily auapended Rrautiaj? of licenaea under modu* oiDeni* until the course of new president known. Wish co-operation. Am writing." So that the subject was under discussion between the Pre- mier of Newfoundland and the Dominion of Canada long before wo knew that my hon. friend was going to make his flourish. The papers 1 shall lay before the House, as 1 pro- mised to do. Tiie hon, gentleman held us responsible for a debate in the Province of Ontario the other day, when Mr. Craig made a motion and Mr. Meredith made a speech. Well, Mr. Speaker, all that I can say is this, those gentle- men are free agents, they can make speeches as they like* We are responsible here in the Dominion Parliament for what we do in the Dominion Parliament. Even here the hon. gentleman would not like to be held responsible for this resolution, because his great friend and sup- porter, the hon. member for North Nor folk (Mr. Charlton) happens to ditter from him. These Conservative gentlemen in Toronto have taken their course. My hon. friend from North Norfolk is a supporter of the hon. gentleman, is a strong leader in the Liberal party. He has taken his course; the hon. gentleman was not bound by that, he has shown that he is not bound by it; and yet if we applied to him the same meatiure that he applies to us, we are to be held responsible, notwithstanding our own assertion, notwith- standing our own vote, notwithstanding our course of action — we are to be held responsible for tho action of Conservatives in another and different sphere. My hon. friend from Northumberland (Mr. Mitchell) the other day, in his very effective speech, a very satisfiac- tory speech from my point of view, said that the Grovern- menti ought to have spoken early in this matter. Well, Mr* Speaker, if we had disallowed the Bill, thai would have been a true remark. If we had taken the responsibility of disallowing the Bi'l, of interfering with the legislation of the Province of Quebec, we'ought to be called upon to state our reasons and to defend our course. But as a matter of course, the legislation of each Province is independent, subject to the restrictions in the Constitution. It requires no 5. defence for the Govern meet of the day to allow an Act of the Local Legislature to tjo into operation. That is their duty as a general rule and there iH no defence required. An attack rauHt bo male if they have improperly allowed an Act to go into operation. Now, in thi'^ case I have no doubt, notwithstanding the able arguments of the hon. member from North Simooo (Mr. McCvarthy) that that measure was within the competence of the Provincial Legislature. Mj' hon. friend who is a much higher authority than myself, the Minister of Justice, came to tlie same con- clusion. I raaj' say that wo, laymen and lawyers in the Cabiiiot, wore unanimous on the point ; and if f had any douot upon the subjeot the able and well reasoned argumout and aueech of my hon. friend from Botbwoll (Mr. Mills) would have removed all doubts from my mind. Now, Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman seemed to intimate that there has been a change of front on this subject. He is wrong. We have carried out fully, in our opinion, the principles la'd down in a report submitted by myself as Minister of Justice in 1869. That report was communicated to all the Governments of the Provinces, and it laid down what wo considered were the principles which should govern the exorcise of the power of disallowance by the G-overnor General on the advice of his Cabinet, and although that was not formally approved, it has really been acted upon and continually quoted by both sides of this House and by both parties in the press, as being a fair description of the instanoes in which the power and right of disallowance should be exercised. Now, this Bill, Mr. Speaker, was either within the competence of the Legislature or it was not. H v/ithin the competence of the Legislature, it must as matter of course, be allowed to go into operation (I know some hon. gentlemen will not »gree with the exception laid down in the report of 1869 and carried out ever since) unless in the opinion of the Government of the Dominion the Act, how- ever much within the competence of the Province, was injurious to the Dominion as a whole. Of course, it is a great responsibilty for any Government to take that course and to decide that any provincial measure is against the interests of the Dominion. But the provision was put into the British North America Act to meet such cases, so that if in any case tho Government oi the Dominion should believe that an Act within the competence of a Province was injurious to the whole Dominion, it was their duty as well as their right to disallow that measure, and for doing so they are responsible to the Parliament of the Dominion, in which Parliament e^ery Province has its 6 represeniativoH, who, of course, aro prepared, an is their duty, to defeod their provincial rightfl. That is the doo- trine in pursuance of which wo have asHumod the respon- eibility of allowing thin TiA\, not disallowing it, and for which we are held responHible. If it is not within the com- peteuoo of the Province, it does not at all follow that it is the duty of the Dominion (xovernment to interfere. Look at the returns laid before Parliament, amounting now to two volumes. You pee again and again reports in which the Minietors of Justice have htiitoi that they believed certain clauses of diirorent measures were ultra vires, yot art they had a beneficial tendency, or as they did not affect the interests of the rest of the Dominion, the attention of the Provincial Let^islaturcs and Provincial (rovernnientH wore called to it, with the suggestion that, if they thought well of it, they should amend the Act in those clauses and in tbo«o particu lars whore?, in the opinion of the Mirtister of . Justice and the Gov )rnraent here, 1 hey had exceeded their legitimate powers. It does not at all follow that because a Bill is ultra vires and is beyond the competence of the Legislature, it should be disallowed. On the contrary, ais has been urged by the hon, member for North York (Mr. Muiock), and very correctly urged, it is just in those cases there is no necessity for disallowance, because there are the courts of law to appeal to. The allowance of a Bill which is ultra vires does not make it law. The courts can at once interfere, and it is only in those cases where Acts aro ultra vires, and where leaving them on the Statute-book would cause great injury to parties, that the right of disallowance should bo exer- cised. Hon. members will readily understand that the moment an Act is passed by a Provincial Legislature people interested in the measure assume it is law, act on it, enter into large enterprises on it, and may be mined if the Government did not immediately, with all convenient speed, interfere to protect those people from injury and ruin. In this case, as I have already said, wo, the Government, including the legal members of it, had no doubt as to the fact that this Act was within the competence of the Local Legislature. And Sir, I think it was not left for ns, we could not as a Government, against the decisions of the Legislature of Old Canada, and against the repeated logislat'on of the Province of Quebec since Confederation, set up our own opinion against the various Acts that have been passed. Why, 37 years ago, by the Legislature of United Canada, where the major- ity of the representatives of the p( ople were Protestants the St. Mary's College was incorporated with large powers' Tho hon. moraber for North Norfolk (Mr. Charlton) says: beoauHO there were some few JoBuit profesworfl, that did not make it a Jesuit college. Now, 1 tell the hon. gentleman that the corporators of the St. Mary's College were tho Bishop of Montreal and six Jesuit priests. .lust as Victoria College is a Methodist College and (Jaeen's a Presby- terian institution, so Si. Mary's College is a Jesuit teaching institution. Mr. BLAKE. Everybody knew it was a Jesuit college. Mr. BERGERON. It has never been disputed. Sir JOHN A. M ACDONALD. Let me call tho attention of tho House to tho division on that occ.ision. Let tho hon. gentleman remember that tho majority that voted for the Bill was 5+ and only seven mombors, on tho third reading, were opposed to it. There was a larger vote against it in the second reading, but, after a full discussion, on the third reading the division was as I have stated. Of the 54 who voted for the incorporation of St. Mary's Collogo 29 wore Protestants and 25 Catholics. I will read to the House some of tho names to show that, although it was known at the time that it was a Jesuit institution, although the ob- jection was taken and arguments wore used somewhat like the arguments used on this occasion, yet there was then no fear ol the Jesuit body, no fear of their insidious attemptto unsettle tho Constitution of Canada, no fear that tho crown of Canada was trembling on the head of Her Majesty, no fear that this country was going to suffer any injury of any kind, and this will be shown when I road to the House some of the names. Judge Badgley, the leading lay represen- tative in the Church of England of Montreal; Hon. M. C. Cameron, a Free Church Presbyterian ; Mr. Clapham, a Church of England man from Quebec; Hon. George Craw- ford, a strong North ot Ireland Protestant, and 1 believe an Orangeman ; Mr. Dawson of London, who everyone re- members as a strong Church of England man ; Mr. Gamble, the special agent ot Bishop Strachan in Parliament when the Clergy Resor es question was settled ; Sir Francis Hincks, whom wo i»'l know ; Mr. Langton, whom the older members of th( House will remember; myself, tho member for Kingsto. ; Mr. McDougall (not the Honorable William), also a Prott itant ; Mr. Hamilton Merritt, whom wo all know as a Liberal in Parlhiment and afterwards a member of the Government; Mr. M( rriaon, I am not sure whether that is Judge Morrison or hie brother, Angus Morrison ; Mr. Page, a prominent representative Irom the Province of Quebec; Mr. Patrick, of Prei^coit, whom we all remember 8 tLH being a good Liberal ; Col. Prince, of Kssox ; Sir William Kichardfl, then the Attorney-Goneral ; Mr. Kidoat, the Con- nervatlv6 member for Toronto; Hon. William Jlobinson, whom we all remombor au the brother of Sir John Kobinnon, iho loader of the old family compact party ; Dr. Kolph ; Sir John Eoho ; Mr. Seymour, uftcrwards a Senator ; lion. JamoB Shaw, afterwards a Senator; Mr. Stevenson, oi Prince Kdward ; the late Mr.ThoraaH Street ; the late the llon.Goorg© O. Stuart, of Quebec ; Mr. C. Wil(*on,of Middloeex ; Mr.Wright, of West York, a loading Orangeman, and, as my friend from London can vouch, a staunch ProtoHtant; those were the gentlemen who voted for thiH Bill, and the members who voted against the Bill were all from Ontario. That is a sufficient answer to my hon. friend from Huntingdon (Mr. Scriver) that in 1852 not one single Protestant representative from the Province of Lower Canada— the Provincoof Quebec— voted againstthe Bill, and that is afull justitication oftbe statement of my hon. friend from Slanstoad (Mr. Colby) when he said that ProtoBtants of the Province of Quebec were not opposed to the legislation of that subject. We find that so lodg as 37 years ago the Jesuit college was established in Montreal. 1 voted for that, Mr. Spe&ker, and 1 never have had cause to regret my vote. That institution has gone on in its work of usefulness. Wo do not hear one single complaint of its teaching, or of any perversion of the youth, nor any disloyal doctrines, or any doctrines which have brought censure on the college. We hear that that institution has gone on and continues to go on doing its work well and devotedly. Now, Mr. Speaker, one would suppose from the speeches we hear now, and the articles which we see in the newspapers, that this was a new invasion of the Jesuits, that they are coming in like the Huns and the Vandals over this country to sweep away civilisation. Well, 37 years ago they were in active and useful operation in Canada, and in 1871, 18 years ago, the Legislature of the Province of Quebec passed, an Act incorporating the Society of Jesus. This Act of 1887 is not the first Act of incorporation. It is an Act altering the provisions of the Act of 1871, and, instead of enlarging their powers, it diminishes the powers given them by the Act of 1871. This Act of 1871 passed the Legislature of Quebec, and we find that there was po protest from the Protestants in Parliament or out of Parliament. We do not find or hear that there was any objection to this Act. Now, be- cause an agitation has grown up in the country — I do not know how or why— it in found that the Act of 1871 ought never to have been passed, that the Act of 1878 limiting this. • I Act of 1871 ought not to be passed, and that bath those Acts, as well as the measure we are now discussing, is deeply injorious to the people of ull the Dominion of Canada. Now, Sir, this Act of 1871 provides : " Whereas the Rev. Fathers Pierre Point, Superior, Firmin ViKnon , Zephirla Resther, sud others, priests and reli(;ious members of the Uom- patiT of Jesus, residing at Quebec, in the build og of the ' Uongregatioa de Notre Dame,' form a body whose object is to perform the various functions of their office, in cities and in country places, such as the Fireachin^ of missions and retreats, and to aRsume the direction of re- igious congregations, brotherhoods and societies both oi men and women ; can also, at the request or with the permission ot their lord- ships the RomftQ Catholic Bishops, or of any one of them, to devote themselves to othT works for spiritual or moral purposes, by preaching, precepts and education ; and, whereas, in order to consolidate their establishment and to favor its prosperity and progress, they have prayed for leave to form a corporate body enjoying civil and political rights ; Therefore, Her Majesty by and with the advice and consent of the Legis- lature ot Quebec, enacts as follows : " 1. The above named petitioners and all other persons who may in future be legally associated with them in virtue of the present Act, are hereby constitute J n 1: ody politic, and shall form a corporation under the name of 'Les mijsionnaires de Notre Dame, S. J.' " 2. The Sdid corporafton shall, under the same name, have perpeti al succession, and shall have all the rights, powers and privileges of ot^er corporations, and particularly of those having a religious, spiritual or moral object. It may at all times admit other members and establish them in one or more places. It may also at all times and places by pur- chase, gift, devise, assignment, loan or in virtue ot this Act, or by any other lawful means and legal title,acquire, possess, inherit, take, have, accept and rece.ve any movable or immovable property whatever, for the usages and purposes of the said corporation, and the same may hypothe- cate, sell, lease, farm out, exchange, alienate, and finally dispose of law- fully, in whole or in part, for the same purposes " And it goes on to say there must be the limit of 810,000 as to the extent of immovable property they should hold. How could the present Government, in the face of the solemn legislation ot United Canada of 1862, and in the face of the legislation of the Proviroo of Quebec in 1871— how could they now set up their own opinion and declare that this was a body that ought not to have existence in Canada ? But, Sir, let us look on it as a matter of common sense. What harm have the Jesuits done, and have they done any ? In 37 years, if their ]irinciple8 were i-o void of mor- ality, if their morality was so doubtful, if their ambition was eo inoidinate they would have shown some evidence of it in y7 years or since their incorporation in 1871. They have gone on in their humble way acting like other Catholic oiders in the Province of Quebec, doing their duty according to their lights. When you talk of their doctrines I have nothing to say about them; all we know is this, their doctrines whatever they are are euch as to meet with the approbation of the Head of their Church or 10 they would soon be informed of it in the aathoritative way which the Head of that Church can govern all such religious bodies within the Catholic religion. Under these circumstances I say We would have been acting with a degree of presumption that t do not think any Canadian Government or any sensible Government in any country would think of exercising if we vetoed this Bill, We had no ground for doing so, we had the sanction of United Canada, as I said before for this Act; we had positive legislation acted upon in the Province of Quebec for eighteen long years, and that we should set up our own opinion is absurd. If we did we would have been justly subject to the condem- nation of every thinking man in Canada. Bat, Sir, we are told all about the expulsion of the Jesuits and the Act of Supremacy, and the unfavorable loijislation that took place in England long long ago. It is too lalo for us to discuss this subject to-night, or I would like very much to do so. But those laws practically have beer obsolete in England. Eng- land is a very Conservative cou itry, and its general policy has been, in the change of manners, \n the advance of educa- tion and liberal ideas, not to rub out statui'e after statute whenever it may apparently infringe upon or bo adverse to the thought of the day, but to allow thona quietly to drop; and what is the conpequonce: Look at England. Are the people of England afraid of the insidious attempts of the Jesuit body to attack the supremacy of England ? Are they afraid that the Queen's crown would tremble on her head ? Sir, one of.the greatefit and finest educational institutions in the world is that of Stoneyhurst, which is altogether con- ducted as a Jesuit institution, where all the English Catho- lics, from the Duke of Norfolk down, are educated ; and anybody who knows the situation of parties in England must know that if there be a loyal body of men in the whole world, if there be a loyal body of men within the dominions of Her Majesty, it is the Englibh Catholics, headed by the Duke of Norfolk, their great chief. In England they are not afraid ; and why should we be afraid ? Why, Mr. Speaker, there are known to be at least 300 Jesuits in England, Jesuit priests teaching. The collateral body, I think, is above 1,000 ; and there are 180 in Ireland. Besides the College at Stoneyhurst, there is the College of Mount St. Mary, and Beaumont College; there are Jesuits teaching a collegiate institute at Canterbury ; there is a collegiate school at Liver- pool ; and there is a Jesuit school in Jersey. The Jesuits are actively employed in educating the youth of England, and we do not find that there is a romonstrunoe anywhere. We do not find that the Acts which would affect their exist- 11 «nce in England have ever been put in foroo. Why, it wonld bo absurd, The Prince of Wales, the heir oi Her Majesty, upon whoae head the Crown of England will some day de- scend— though wo all hope that Her Majesty may long con- tinue to wear it — does not think his position as a Protestant sovereign will be affected by the fact that there are Jesuits in Canada or in P]ngland. At the requiem service at a Jesuit Church the other day, for the Archduke Rndulpb, whose nnhappy fate \v\^ all know, the Prince of Wales was proi>ent, and, strange Lo say, was so unconscious ol iLe danger that ho was running that after the sarvica was over, h > askeJ the superior, as a souvenir of the event, to make him a gift of his raiesal or mas.s book. And Canada is the only country in the world where there are Josuits, which is afraid of their insidious attempts to unsettle the constitu- tion. Thord." are Jesuits by tno thousands in the United States, and if (!3anada is in dangor, they can overflow into Canada just as well from the United fcJtates as they can from England, or be educated in the country. And, as a Presbyterian clergyman said in the pulpit hero, this, after all, is a more matter of money ; and that a religious excite- ment should be raised on a sum of money, and a small sum, shows how easily the public may be excited if only a ciy is got up, especially on religious subjects. We know that public agitation may go on sometimes without reason, and to a great extent, one cannot but deeply rogret t:hai the hon. member for Muskoka felt it to be his duty to make this motion, which ought not to have been made — this motion which will be the eause of a great deal of discomfort in Canada. 1 look back, Mr. Speaker, and I re- member the great social evils that religious evils have caused in this country. I remember when the whole country was roused on the Clerg/ Reserve question. William Lyon Mackenzie said in the Parliament of Canada, after he came came back from hU exile, that the proximate cause of the rebellion in Upper Canada was the Clergy Reserve question and the agitation npon it. One can also remember how neighbor was set against neighbor on the separate school question ; and, therefore, I feel deeply that this country is injured, greatly injured — of coarse, my hon. friend does not think so — by the projection of this subject in this popular assembly ; and we cannot see what the lesult m^y be. 1 hope and believe it will fade away like other cries, and I am induced to do HO when I look back at the events connected with the Papal Aggression Bill of 1850 1 happened to be in England in 1850. Then the excitement was tremendous, caused 12 chiefly by the tetter written by Lord John RuseoU, the Dur- ham letter, and by the very unwise condaot of Cardinal Wieoman in making the announcoment in the way he did. 1 remember the excitement in England. Cardinal Wise- man, although having an English name, was a foreigner, a Spaniard; and when he fl-iunted the Papal decretals from over the Flaminian gate with a great deal of po.ap and cere- mony, it roused the sensibilities of the Engliph people, and Lord John Russell took advantage of the excitement in order to make capital for himself. The agitation was so groat in England that there was danger of a recurrence of the Lord (reorgo Oiordon riots. As in those days, the streets and the doors were marked : " no Popery," Whenever I went along the streets I saw chalked on the houses: " No Popery." 1 think no one went so far as the celebrated clown Griraaldi in Lord George Gordon's days, when he wrQ^^te on his door : *' No Religion." But we all remember the caustic cartoon in Punch, picturing Lord John Russell us a little boy in but- tons, who wrote " No Popery " on the walls, and then ran away. What was the result of that cry ? I was a younger man then than now, and I must say I was for a time carried away. The excitement was contagious, wherever I wont, at the theatres and elsewhere, the cry was : " God save the Queen, and down with the Pope." You could not go in to a place of public amusement but the crouds would assemble^ and it was found necessary to put guaros on the banks and to protect Roman Catholic chapels. But Mr. Gladstone and scoe cooler heads Mr. MILLS (Bothwell), Sir James Graham. Sir JOHN A. MACDONALD. Yes ; Mr. Gladstone, Sir Jaroofe Graham, and some others opposed the measure, which had a most ignominious ending. Not one single prosecution took place under that Act. Not one single proceeding was taken under it, and a few years afterwards, in 1871, the Act \fras repealed in silence. Not a single observation was made to continue it in its wretched existence. Mr. BLAKE. Everybody was ashamed of it. Sir JOHN A. MACDJNALD. Kvorybody, as the hon. member lor the West Durham (Mr. Blake) says, was ashamed of it, The Bill was scouted out of Parliament, although the excitement hsid been originally so enor- mous, 1 cannot convey to you the excitement that existed in England at that lime. I hope and believe that when this matter is fully understood in the Province of On- tario, when the exhaustive speeches that were made upon 13 I it are read and discussed and weigbed, the country will see that their apprehensions are unfounded, and that the country io safe. Why, there are in all the Dominion of Canada 71 Jesuits. Are they going to conquer the whole of Canada ? Is Protestantism to be subdued ? Is the Dorainflfcn to be seduced from its faith by 71 Jesuit priests ? They are armed with a string of beads, a eash around their waists and a mass book or missal. What harm can they do ? I told my reverend and eloquent friend, Dr. Potts of Toronto, thatl would match him physically and spiritually, against any follower of Ignatius Loyola in the whole Dominion of Canada. Now, only think of it. The Jesuits claim, and claimed with an appearance of right, that the effect of their restoration shouid be to give them back all their own pro- perty. Ihey contended for that, and they had the right to fight the best battle they could. Look at the papers. They said that the value of the property was 82,0U0,0uO, but they came down, hoviever, graciously, and said they would take $1,000,000, or, to be accurate, I think, $900,000. But the Government of the Province of Quebec said : No, you cannot have that, you can only have $400,000— not a very large sum Why, Mr. Mercier has been granting, in the interest of his country, sums as big as that for railways here and there through Quebec. We do the same thiig here. It is no very large sura. But not only did Mr. Mercier con- fine the vote to $400,000 but he said : You shall have not the whole of it; perhaps you shall have none of it. The other ecclesiastic institutions, Catholic college^', said they had a right to their share. Now, it was a family matter, it waain/oro domestico, and, as the hon. member lor Bothwell (Mr. Mills) truly said, it was their own money, it was the property of the Province of Quebec and they could do with it as they liked. There is almoisL nosubject to which the Quebec Government could not apply these moneys under the general phrase of " property and civil righis." The lands themselves, if they came to the old Pravince of Canada by escheat, the moment that Upper and Lower Canada were severed, those lands, by the terras of the Britibh North America Act, became, like any other bublic lands in the Province of Quebec, subject to be sold or kept or retained or applied for any purpose the Govern- ment of that Province chose. You cannot bind any Pro- vince to carry out the original intentions of the donors. This land became their property, and the representatives of the people, the legislators of the Province, have a right to apply their own property and the proceeds of their property for any purpose they have a right to 14 deal with under the powerh of the Act. How does it turn out ? It was left to the Pope to settle in what proportion the different collegiate institulionH should have this $400,000, and Jlis Ilolinoss, instead of being the special supporter of the Jesuit Order, instead of prensing their interests on the people of Canada, instead of it^iving them we^h in order to advance their insidious designs against the Crown and dignity of Canada, cut them down to the miserable sum of $160,000. ]Ie has given the rest of it to the other collegiate institutions and to the bifhops for the purposes of higher education. I hear the argu.iicnt stated that it is DOt stated, in so many words, that the money going to the Jesuits shall be devoted to educational purposes. Why, they are a teaching body in Canada exclugiveiy no'V. There is not a single parif>h in the whole Province of Quebec which has a Josuit as its cur^ , there is not a single parish in which the Jesuits have any control. They are a teaching body in the Province of t^ueboo. They have a mitjriion iri|Ahich education and Christianity go hand inhand among the Indians and the Esquimaux on the Labrador coast, where they ar-e doing a great deal of good, where they are suffering the hardships and miseries which wo read in Park man they were always ready to suffer in the cause of religion and humanity. And, strange to say, if we go west, leaving the Eastern Provirice of Quebec, to the Province of Munitooa, we find there the College of St. Boniface with Archbishop Taehe at its head, and the professors are six Jesuit priests. We do not hear of Manitoba raising up a cry against that institution. We know how easily popular excitement in a young country like that, full ot ardent spirits, can be raised, I have occasion to know something about that. Weil, they submit to the enormous wrong of having six Jesuit priests teaching in Manitoba with as much apathy as the Protestants in the Province of Quebec ; and moro than that, strange to say, there is the Anglican clergy nnder the charge of the Bishop of the Church of England, there is the Presbyterian clergy under the charge of the Presbyterian body, and they aie so recreant to their Pro- testantiism, they are so apathetic, that they have joined hand-in-hand in forming a common university, that common university giving degrees, and the governing body of that university is composed of Catholics, Presbyterians Angli- cans. And all this cry is for some $160,000, which, at lour per cent., amour, is to some $6,0UU a year. I cannot but re- member the story of the Jew going in to an eating hoase and being seduced by a slice of ham. When he came oat, it so >; 15 li P happened there was a crash of thunder, and he said : Good heavens, what a row about a little bit of pork.» It is a little bit of pork, and as the poor Jew escaped being crushed by the thunderbolt, I have no doubt Canada will escape from the enormous sum of 8f»,000 a year. If this Bill had been introduced in other terms it would have been fortunate. I agree with those gentlemen who say that the framers of the Bill, by the way it is drawn and the insertion of these reci- tals, almost court the oppowition of the member for Muskoka. I agree that that is so, and, if the Bill had not mentioned the Society of Jesus, it would have passed without any opposition. If tbe mouviy had been given to the Sulpicians, the money had been given to the University of Laval, if if the money had been given to the bishops of the different dioceses for higher education, no one would have objected to it, this Bill would not have excited any attention ; but, it is just because the Jesuits have got historically a bad name from Protestiint history, and it was simply because their name was in the Bill that all tbi^ agitation has been aroused. This eubject is not a new one. Years and years ago, long before Confederation, the subject was discut?sed in Par- liament, and strong arguments were used agaicst the recog- nition of ihe claim for Jesuits' estates, and the feeling of op- position was shown and emphasised in the sentence which was used by a worthy member of Parliament — a good Grit he was, by the way, and a very respectable and honest man, strange to say — but he exemplified the feeling of the coun- try in one sentence. His speech was a very effective one. It was this: "Mr. Speaker, I don't like them there Jesites," That was the feeling. There was a prejudice against the Jesuits, and it is from that same prejudice that all this agita- tion has been aroused. Now, 1 can only repeat that the Government would have performed an act of tyranny if they had disallowed the Bill. Believing as we do that it is per- fectly within the competence of that Legislature, and does not in any way affect any other portion of Her Majesty's dominions, there would be no excuse for our interfering, even according to the rigid principles which my hon. friend opposite thinks govern us. I agree strongly with the lan- guage used by the hon. member for North York (Mr. Mulock) Supposing this Bill had been disallowed, Mr. Mercier would have gained a great object. He would have been the champion of his church. The moment it was announced that this Bill was disallowed there would have been a sum- mons for a meeting of the Legislature of Quebec. They would have passed that Bill unanimously, and would have ent it back here, and what would have been the conse- 16 quonce ? No Government can bo formed in Canada, either by myself, or by the hon. member who moves this resola- tion (Mr. O'Brien), or by my hon. friend who sits opposite (Mr. Laarior), havinpj in view the disallowance of such a measure. What would be the consequence of a disallowance? Agitation, a quarrel— a racial and a religious war would be aroused. The best interests of the country would be preju- diced, our credit would be ruined abroad, and our social relations destroyed at home. I cannot sufficiently picture in my faint language, the misery and the wretchedness which would have been heaped upon Canada if this question having been agitated as it has been, and would be, had cul* minated in a series of disallowances of ttis Act. A. BiNKCAL, Superintendent of Printing.